San Francisco, 12:33 AM
Thu Dec 10
25 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz |
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders |
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner |
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis |
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan |
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier |
Ed Grabianowski |
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan |
Lauren Davis |
Chris Hsiang |
Lynn Peril |
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins |
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox |
Interns:
Tim Barribeau |
Julia Carusillo |
Alex Eichler |
Cyriaque Lamar |
Caitlin Petrakovitz |
Mary Ratliff |
Josh Snyder |
Also, the vocalization consisting of "zoom a zoom zoom" and "boom boom" has been shown to stimulate furious monkey rump shaking in many primate species.
Agree with this chart or not, we all have to admit that those are some sassy human silhouettes.
I've always found this sort of research extremely interesting. Learning about the sexuality of many species of swan especially. I'm not sure how people can say homosexuality isn't "natural" when it happens in nature on a regular basis. Hell, dolphins (river dolphins especially) are all sorts of freaky-deaky with the sexual practices.
Wait, which genes in particular are these they cite in humans?
Can someone link me to reports on "a single copy of a gene promotes survival, but two promote homosexuality", along with "alleles promoting homosexuality in one sex increase fitness in the other"? I'm not saying they don't exist, but I've never heard solid evidence for either.
@DrMathochist: So far, there are no genetic studies of homosexuality in humans that have both found something significant and been replicated. (For the record, most studies on sexual orientation are done with male participants--it's easier to get an effect with males than with females.) Dean Hamer was the only researcher who ever really found anything; Hamer's research in the early 90s was promising, but fizzled out when no one--not even his own lab--could replicate the findings. That's been the pattern in a lot of physiological studies of human homosexuality, actually, like Simon LeVay's brain slices. Big fuss, dies down once everybody realizes it's not replicable and therefore probably not true.
A big part of the problem is sheer computing power--the amount of data in a single human genome is staggering, and so far, studies on candidate genes for sexual orientation have only used markers, rather than whole genomes. We're only looking at a tiny fraction of the potential available data; no wonder we're missing things. It's my opinion that the genetic aspect of sexual orientation is going to have both genetic and epigenetic factors involved, that the genes in question will be numerous, and that we're really going to have to wait for anything cool on this until we can compare thousands of whole genomes.
The best model at the moment, given that identical twins can be discordant for sexual orientation (but are less likely to be discordant than the general population), is a diathesis-stress model, where a genetic predisposition is activated by environmental factors. Those factors could be operating in utero, so it's perfectly possible that people really are born gay, but most laypeople misinterpret it to mean that it's either 100% genetic or 100% choice, without considering that those two things are not end-points on the same spectrum.
(Also, YOU try getting funding to look for what makes people gay. Right-wing and left-wing alike are against finding a genetic cause, and most moderate people are only mildly interested in the question. And once you add in the diathesis-stress model aspect, where even if you find gay genes you still haven't fully answered the question... well, your potential sponsors are edging toward the door. And bringing up bisexuality, or, for that matter, female homosexuality--it's a research morass. I wish researchers in that field the best of luck, and will stick to attitudes, which are EASY to measure.)
@kristophine: Kristophine, that was an excellent sum-up of current scientific speculation. I would like to add, however, that there really is nothing wrong with the theory that genes that potentially influence sexuality may also impart some evolutionary benefit. Impossible to demonstrate right now, but it's a sound hypothesis.
@NerD: Blattella: I'd love to comment on that weird obsession some girls have, aged 7 to 17, with dolphins.
Being a very well brought-up girl myself, I would never dare.
@NerD: Blattella: Bortsch. I totally forgot the bloody unicorns.
Look... I have Master degrees in Literature - I could still make you a lecture on the symbolism of unicorns in Medieval bestiaries. I think. It would include a lot of sex talk and weird pictures.
@NerD: Blattella: Oh my goodness, dolphins nearly rival humans in terms of "hey I think I'll just stick this any ol' place and see if it feels good". It's like they're bored teenagers, only all the time for their whole life.
@Heriloke: I am not one of those parents. ;) But never mind. I'll just keep ignoring the irony of people wearing a religious symbol that is an instrument of torture.
@Starlionblue: I know. And thinking that the only thing that keeps me off the Pastafarian church is my reluctance to wear a spaghetti Bolognese necklace.
If I ever get kids, my hypothetical girls will never see the colour pink before they reach majority. And dolls will most likely be banned.
I thought the idea of homosexuality becoming the social norm in "The Forever War" was pretty interesting, but I hadn't realized they narrowed down the genetic background of it in humans.
Have they really found specific genetic alleles that are linked to survival advantages and homosexuality? Or is this more of a possibility/theory than a sum of papers' results? I feel like there'd be more of an uproar if the supposed "gay gene" were found.
"always excellent New Scientist", well, if you're into speculative fiction, that fits. If you actually want science, it's more like 60%-70% excellent. But that's still better than most periodicals.
I'm sure Orson Scott Card is hard at work right now on a story about a group of plucky preadolescent adventurers working to stamp out homosexuality throughout human evolution aboard their microscopic time traveling "bioship," the Proposition 8.
@lightninglouie: Nah. More likely he'll just write another essay about how this study is the result of a vast left-wing conspiracy to suppress real science.
*sigh*
Great write, but tends to get too bogged down in his politics these days (like many, many writers - left and right).
@lightninglouie: I was going to say something with Stephenie Meyer in it, but.. well. Orson Scott Card. Same difference.
Vampires as heterosexuals. That'd make Meyer the exact opposite of Anne Rice, no?
This friends is Kevin Randleman after his MRSA infection. If you don't want staph then wash. If you go to the gym you're likely to pick it up from the mats, the benches, treadmill controls. If you don't think any of the above are being cleaned properly do it yourself or find a new gym. Then Shower, either there or at home.
If you have to get surgery, all you can do is hope and pray that everyone that's touched you and worked in the room before you're in is actually sticking to Universal Precautions. It's out of your hands and you're screwed if the people at the hospital don't care. If you work in a hospital, tattoo parlor, dentist office, etc... stick to your universal precautions or you could do this to one of your patients because you don't want to foam, wash or wear gloves.
I've got a crazy idea...some insane company creates a genetically modified corn. Then that corn spreads everywhere and, consequently, anyone who has their corn growing on their land has to pay a fine. Thus spawning a financial apocalypse.
NAHHH!!! That's too outlandish. No one would ever buy the premise.
12/08/09
12/08/09
Rock me Dr. Zaius.
12/08/09
PARTY TIME! Monkeys love them some 90's music.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
Plenty of animals masturbate, too - I expect they do so because they enjoy it.
-Kle.
12/08/09
I've always found this sort of research extremely interesting. Learning about the sexuality of many species of swan especially. I'm not sure how people can say homosexuality isn't "natural" when it happens in nature on a regular basis. Hell, dolphins (river dolphins especially) are all sorts of freaky-deaky with the sexual practices.
12/08/09
12/07/09
Can someone link me to reports on "a single copy of a gene promotes survival, but two promote homosexuality", along with "alleles promoting homosexuality in one sex increase fitness in the other"? I'm not saying they don't exist, but I've never heard solid evidence for either.
12/07/09
A big part of the problem is sheer computing power--the amount of data in a single human genome is staggering, and so far, studies on candidate genes for sexual orientation have only used markers, rather than whole genomes. We're only looking at a tiny fraction of the potential available data; no wonder we're missing things. It's my opinion that the genetic aspect of sexual orientation is going to have both genetic and epigenetic factors involved, that the genes in question will be numerous, and that we're really going to have to wait for anything cool on this until we can compare thousands of whole genomes.
The best model at the moment, given that identical twins can be discordant for sexual orientation (but are less likely to be discordant than the general population), is a diathesis-stress model, where a genetic predisposition is activated by environmental factors. Those factors could be operating in utero, so it's perfectly possible that people really are born gay, but most laypeople misinterpret it to mean that it's either 100% genetic or 100% choice, without considering that those two things are not end-points on the same spectrum.
(Also, YOU try getting funding to look for what makes people gay. Right-wing and left-wing alike are against finding a genetic cause, and most moderate people are only mildly interested in the question. And once you add in the diathesis-stress model aspect, where even if you find gay genes you still haven't fully answered the question... well, your potential sponsors are edging toward the door. And bringing up bisexuality, or, for that matter, female homosexuality--it's a research morass. I wish researchers in that field the best of luck, and will stick to attitudes, which are EASY to measure.)
12/08/09
12/07/09
12/07/09
Being a very well brought-up girl myself, I would never dare.
12/07/09
12/07/09
Look... I have Master degrees in Literature - I could still make you a lecture on the symbolism of unicorns in Medieval bestiaries. I think. It would include a lot of sex talk and weird pictures.
12/07/09
12/08/09
More likely, some people will soon be burning offensive symbols and run to the nearest church.
Could be fun!
12/08/09
Edit: And gay werewolves.
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
12/08/09
If I ever get kids, my hypothetical girls will never see the colour pink before they reach majority. And dolls will most likely be banned.
12/09/09
12/07/09
Have they really found specific genetic alleles that are linked to survival advantages and homosexuality? Or is this more of a possibility/theory than a sum of papers' results? I feel like there'd be more of an uproar if the supposed "gay gene" were found.
12/07/09
12/07/09
12/07/09
12/07/09
*sigh*
Great write, but tends to get too bogged down in his politics these days (like many, many writers - left and right).
12/07/09
Vampires as heterosexuals. That'd make Meyer the exact opposite of Anne Rice, no?
12/06/09
If you have to get surgery, all you can do is hope and pray that everyone that's touched you and worked in the room before you're in is actually sticking to Universal Precautions. It's out of your hands and you're screwed if the people at the hospital don't care. If you work in a hospital, tattoo parlor, dentist office, etc... stick to your universal precautions or you could do this to one of your patients because you don't want to foam, wash or wear gloves.
12/06/09
12/04/09
NAHHH!!! That's too outlandish. No one would ever buy the premise.